0
How was the Soviet involvement in Afghanistan similar to U.S. Involvement in Vietnam?
Wiki User
∙ 8y ago
The United State's involvement in Vietnam and the Soviet Union is similar to Afghanistan because troops remained for years. Additionally, the United States was involved to ensure the protection of the citizens.
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
Wiki User
∙ 8y agoThe US & USSR got involved with foreign countries and stayed a long time. 1. USSR casualties were about a third of US casualties. 2. USSR fought insurgents that represented no government nor country. 3. USSR Air Force fought no adversary jets. There was no aerial combat in Afghanistan. 4. USSR conducted no bombing campaigns (heavy bombers, such as the B52) as there was no government to bomb. 5. USSR armor (tanks) engaged no enemy armor; the enemy had no tanks.
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoLong, frustrating, and the Soviets withdrew. Other than that they were about as similar as the Boer War and WWI. The USSR didn't have to contend with combating another air force, navy, or army in Afghanistan; the US did.
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoThe Soviet Air Force did not engage the Afghanistan Air Force. There were no aerial dog-fights between those two air forces. There were no jet aces from either side; since they never fought each other.
The Russian (Soviet) Navy never fought the Afghanistan Navy, there was no "Tonkin Gulf" incidents (engagements between the US Navy & North Viet Navy). The nearest ocean to Afghanistan is the Arabian Sea and that sea is blocked by Iran & Pakistan.
The Soviet (Russian) army never fought the Afghanistan army; the USSR was not at war with Afghanistan.
Comparisons? The same as would be of the British in Afghanistan or other Southwestern Asian nations in the 1800s. Or even coalition troops in Iraq or current Afghanistan...etc. One cannot compare one war to another unless they fit the basic criteria: One nation fighting another nation, then comparisons can be made. As it stands the Russian fought a long campaign in Afghanistan and then withdrew with less than satisfactory results, that was the closest it came to being their "Vietnam". Their casualties were 1/5 of US Viet War casualties and the Soviets lost far fewer jets & helicopters than did the Americans. But the Americans had jet to jet air duels; the Soviets did not.
Wiki User
∙ 8y agoThe main similarity between the US War in Vietnam and the Soviet War in Afghanistan was that these were wars that were badly executed by the superpower to support a puppet regime in that country that eventually fell after the superpower lost numerous casualties from a guerrilla insurgency supported by the other superpower.
Wiki User
∙ 7y agoBoth were situations where larger imperial power (US or USSR) invaded a smaller third world country (Vietnam or Afghanistan) with the goal of imposing their form of government (military Dictatorship or communist dictatorship). Additionally, the third world country (Vietnam or Afghanistan) was able to defeat the imperial power (US or USSR) through a guerilla war of attrition, making the home populations in the imperial power protest the piling dead and force the leadership to withdraw troops. The leaders of these guerilla movements would then be the rulers of the country and not the government that was formerly defended by the imperial powers.
Wiki User
∙ 9y agoHi, my name is Elsa and I "Let it go❄"
Wiki User
∙ 8y agoglobal war on terrisom
Wiki User
∙ 8y agothey both were involved
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How far did American Involvement in Vietnam change 1954-1973?
How far did American Involvement in Vietnam change, 1954 -- 1973?American involvement in Vietnam, or Indo-China as it was called when a French colony, began initially when the U.S joined WWII in 1942. At that time the Americans gave weapons and financial aid to help nationalist guerrilla forces led by Vo Nguyen Giap, known as the Viet Minh, in their war of independence against the Japanese who had taken control of the colony. With the Japanese finally defeated in 1945, Ho Chi Minh, a collaborator of Giap's, appealed to the people of Vietnam to rise up in revolution before the French could re-take power. The Viet Minh quickly seized government and police buildings in the north, declaring Ho Chi Minh their president. Ho kept hidden from the anti-communist Americans his communist ideas, and so they raised no objection. However a full scale war shortly broke out between the French and the Viet Minh which dragged on until 1954 when the French were finally defeated at Dien Bien Phu. In this time China had turned communist and had supported the Viet Minh in their struggle. However the U.S, aware of China's involvement, and fearing the spread of communism, supported the French. Despite all this, the French were beaten. France would not be the last western power to underestimate the resolve of the Viet Minh.Here begins the American involvement in Vietnam from 1954 -- 1973. Assuming involvement to be the actions and measures deployed by the American authorities, and not for example, independent American journalists in Vietnam, I will try to show how far this involvement changed in nature and amount.After Dien Bien Phu, an agreement was made at Geneva with involvement from the U.S as well as other major powers (China, America and the Soviet Union) that Vietnam be divided along the 17th parallel and would be temporarily two countries, North and South Vietnam, with Ho Chi Minh leader of the north and Ngo Dinh Diem in the south. Elections for a government to re-unite the country would be held on July 1956. Up until this point America's involvement in Vietnam never extended beyond the political. Post-war America was strongly opposed to the communist ideology which was hostile to their idea of democracy, and feared that it would spread. Under the terms of Geneva, the Americans supported the establishment of an anti-communist government in South Vietnam to act as the cornerstone of the "Free World in South-east Asia" as John. F. Kennedy put it when a senator at the time.With doubtful feelings about its success in achieving its aims at Geneva, the USA felt a deep responsibility to the country of Vietnam after all the commitments it had made to shape its future, both in WWII and in its support of the French attempt to re-conquer it. This view was expressed by Senator John F. Kennedy when describing Vietnam, "It is our offspring, we cannot abandon it, we cannot ignore its needs." (quoted in George C. Herring's "America's Longest War, page 43) Eisenhower echoes this concern in his description of the domino theory, a belief that the countries of South-east Asia were like dominos, waiting to be pushed over by the tide of communism from China and the Soviet Union, where he states "Asia has already lost 450 million of its peoples to communist dictatorship. We simply can't afford greater losses." (quoted in "Vietnam 1960-1975" by S. Waugh and J. Wright) The sources agree and are a reflection of popular American opinion at the time.Eisenhower was an influential and popular president and his anti-communist views were shared by the American public. Kennedy inherited and agreed with the anti-communist attitude. Holding true to the Truman doctrine of 1947, America continued its policy of the containment of communism, doing everything it could to weaken, discreetly, the Viet Minh regime in the North and so hamper its preparation for the elections to come. These surreptitious methods of sabotage included "attempting to destroy the government's printing presses and pouring contaminants into the engines of busses to demobilize the transport system." ("America's Longest War" George C. Herring page 44) and were carried out under the direction of a CIA team to try and encourage people to move to the south. Herring's book is used to teach the subject of the Vietnam War in universities, while Herring himself is a professor of History at the University of Kentucky. For this reason we may consider his book to be a reliable source for a balanced view of the war.Aside from this paramilitary involvement, the Americans established the South-East Asian Treaty Organisation (SEATO) which included the countries of Laos and Cambodia, in their attempts to strengthen ties with other countries in the area and try to deter communist aggression. The determination of Eisenhower to support Diem's corrupt but anti-communist government went as far as allowing official South Vietnamese elections to be rigged in Saigon and backing Diem's refusal to hold the planned elections of 1956. This undermined the American dedication to democracy and freedom of speech as well as America's criticism of Stalin's refusal to hold elections in Eastern Europe. Excuses of alleged North Vietnamese violations of the Geneva agreement aside, the truth of America's motives for the extended political involvement in Vietnam was admitted by Eisenhower himself, "It was generally agreed that had an election been held, Ho Chi Minh would have been elected Premier..." It is likely that Eisenhower is writing with sincerity here because this is after the war when he would have been at more liberty to speak his mind. This disclosure betrays the American awareness of Ho Chi Minh's popularity and possibly Eisenhower's real intentions for supporting Diem's refusal to hold elections.America's approval and support of Diem continued and was expressed by Kennedy's vice president Lyndon Johnson, when visiting Diem in1961, where he makes clear America's commitment to Vietnam and to Diem, hailing him the "Churchill of Asia". While this may be considered hyperbole with regards to Diem, it did show America's willingness to support an anti-communist government. The U.S continued to keep up the input of money, weapons and advice that was being pumped into the country. From 1955-1962 this continued with few changes in the nature of the American involvement in Vietnam. However, the amount steadily increased as the U.S military group known as the MAAG, assumed responsibility over the training of the SVA, instead of the French. In 1961, when Kennedy had become president the year before, he sent 400 advisors in a response to the uprisings led by a new political party that wanted a united Vietnam, called the National Liberation Front (NLF). Advisor levels rose as shown in sources "www.americanwarlibrary.com/vietnam/vwatl.htm" and "wiki.answers.com/Q/U.S._Troop_levels_in_Vietnam_War" which both agree with each other. A rising number of troops is tantamount to a rising amount of involvement and so these sources are useful because they indicate at what rate involvement was increasing or decreasing. However, little direct intervention was made until 1962, when the Americans began spraying defoliants on Vietnamese forests to expose Viet Minh hideouts, supply lines and crops; a sudden turn in American involvement, with Americans openly damaging Vietnamese vegetation. Increased involvement of a domestic kind also occurred in 1962, where the Americans and South Vietnamese governments pioneered the strategic hamlet programme, moving South Vietnamese peasants from suspected Viet Minh areas to purpose-built villages away from Viet Minh threat. The plan was a disaster, raising Viet Minh support and dissent for the Americans.Despite this extended military involvement, America did not engage in open warfare until 1964 with the passing of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. Political involvement within South Vietnam was restrained in the beginning of Diem's government where the Americans let him rule with a free hand. Despite the expanding influence of Americans in the area, Diem remained overall in charge, not always following the advice of his American advisors and so American political involvement was limited to advising. One of the earliest incidents of this (www.rationalrevolution.net/war/american_involvement_in_vietnam) was at the elections for president of the Republic of Vietnam. Having turned a blind eye to their rigging, the Americans urged Diem to show the results as no higher than 70% in his favour, to make it seem convincing. Diem ignored this and used the rigged result of 98.2% instead. By 1963 however, the Americans realised their mistake of backing him and gave support to a plot lead by leading South Vietnamese generals who arrested and shot Diem.Under Lyndon Johnson in 1963, it was becoming clear to America that its advisory role was not sufficient and that direct military action would be needed to defeat the Viet Minh. In 1964, the controversial Gulf of Tonkin incident occurred that gave Johnson his excuse to extend American military involvement. The warship USS Maddox was supposedly fired upon by North Vietnamese ships. Congress reacted furiously, passing the Gulf of Tonkin resolution that permitted the President to take whatever military measures he deemed necessary in Vietnam. Johnson made clear his determination to retaliate with greater military involvement, stating "that all such attacks will be opposed," (S. Waugh and J. Wright, 2010, p.g) At first American involvement was restrained, but after the after further Viet Minh aggression and an incident where "Seven Americans died and 100 were wounded" (Daynes, 2008, p.g 23) The beginning of 1965 saw a sudden escalation of American involvement with the widespread bombing raids of operation "Rolling Thunder" and the departure of thousands of the first US combat troops. By the end of the year troop levels had reached 184,300, eight times more than in 1964.American troops began direct combat with the Viet Minh in Search and Destroy missions that consisted of troops searching for and then destroying suspected Viet Minh villages. The Huey helicopter was instrumental in these missions. The damaging effects of this form of involvement on both the villages and villagers were obvious. "Children were whimpering. Women were poking through the smouldering debris of the houses" (S. Waugh S. Wright, 2010, p.g 19) as the AID worker Doug Ramsey described a scene at a Search and Destroy mission. The source is a reliable one for describing the nature of US involvement at the time, for it is supported by other similar accounts by other Americans (Ben Walsh, date, p.g 302) who would have had no personal obligation to portray the war in any particular way. Over the course of the year, involvement changes a great deal, with extensive bombing not just on North Vietnam but also over the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Chemical weapons such as Napalm were deployed for a higher "body count", something General Westmoreland was convinced would bring victory.Until the announcement of President Nixon's policy of Vietnamization in 1969, the nature of American involvement changed little, with heavy reliance upon, bombing, defoliants, and Search and Destroy missions. The hopelessness of the war becoming apparent, the frustrations of the war were responsible for motivating American atrocities in some villages, most notably My Lai, which exposed the growing criminal nature of some aspects of the war. Speaking in 1967, Ho Chi Minh voiced his outrage at the US involvement, "the US has ceaselessly intervened in Vietnam. The US government has committed war crimes... half a million US troops have resorted to inhumane weapons... used to massacre our people... and raze our villages to the ground... We will never submit to force; never accept talks under threat of bombs." (Ben Walsh, Date, p.g 302) The source is not entirely trustworthy as Ho was speaking as a leader during the war and so one of the purposes of the speech would been to rouse anti-American feeling an Nationalism amongst his people. Still, it does demonstrate, however exaggeratedly, the scale of US involvement, which was increasing till after 1968. Contrary to this disgust of American involvement, one of Lyndon Johnson's justifications of it was, "Our numbers have increased in Vietnam because the aggression of others has increased in Vietnam. There is not, and there will not be, a mindless escalation." The sources differ just as two leaders would who both are fighting a war, but the fact remains clear; American involvement increased vastly in the years up to 1968, as shown in peaking US troop levels (536,100) and troop deaths (16,592) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_casualties downloaded 21st January 2011)To compensate for the reduction in troops that began to pull out in 1969, an intense bombing campaign on Hanoi was launched from 1970 to 1972 to hinder the progression of the Viet Minh and force the North Vietnamese to negotiating a peace. Here one form of involvement decreased (troop levels) for the increase of another (American bombing) However, the general American involvement did rapidly decrease with the withdrawal of 400,000 combat troops from 1969 to the end of 1971, in the sense that less Americans were now involved. A large amount of political involvement occurred in peace talks that had begun in 1968 and which came to a conclusion in 1973. It was agreed that all US troops were to leave Vietnam within 60 days, thus ending America's military involvement. Only the financial aid continued while other forms of involvement declined or completely ceased.In conclusion, the American involvement in Vietnam changed a great deal, with high political, financial and paramilitary involvement throughout and rapidly increasing military involvement until 1969. The nature of military involvement changed a lot with the spraying of defoliants over Vietnamese forests in 1962, to heavy bombing campaigns in the north in 1964, then the arrival of the first combat troops who initially operated a defensive strategy in 1965, which soon became more aggressive with the policy of "Search and Destroy". The nature of the personal involvement of American troops became unacceptable amongst the American public especially after the exposure of the My Lai massacre in 1969. only increased in amount This then rapidly fell with the removal of all troops by 1973.
How are the ataturk of turkey and ho chi minh of Vietnam similar?
One way in which Atatürk of Turkey and Ho Chi Minh of Vietnam are similar is that they both led nationalist movements in their countries.
Was there an organization in Vietnam similar to Blackwater in the 60's?
CIA handled those matters.
What is a Marine Infantry Battalion?
For the US Army, during the Vietnam War, a battalion was about 600 men. The US Marine Corps will be similar in organization (during the Vietnam era).
Did American soldiers commit atrocities during the Vietnam War in 1969?
Yes they did. In fact more than an estimated 2 million Vietnamese civilians were unnecessarily slaughtered in this forgotten genocide. Entire villages full of women (many pregnant), children, and even elderly were slaughtered senselessly by U.S troops similar to what they are currently doing in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
How was the foreign policy of George Washington John Adams and Thomas Jefferson similar?
attempted to avoid involvement in the european affairs
How is organic farming methods are similar to natural ecosystem processes?
no human involvement, no pesticide use etc.. all organic/ natural
What human rights are most often subject to violation in countries such as Afghanistan and Vietnam?
The human rights in Afghanistan and Vietnam are fairly similar to the American rights. The government has limited freedom of speech, there is no registration of religious groups required and woman and men have equal rights.
How was the soviet involved in Afghanistan similar to us involved in Vietnam?
Sometimes when i fart i poo a little and if i try and hold it it comes out my nose.
Why was Afghanistan know as the soviet union's Vietnam?
This appellation came from the fact that the Soviet-Afghanistan War of 1979-1989 was a war in which many Soviet troops, trying to prop up a pro-Soviet government, died in a foreign land (Afghanistan) opposed by rebel insurgents (Mujahedin). This was very similar to the US experience in the Second Indochinese War (called the Vietnam War in the USA), where many US troops, trying to prop up a pro-US government, died in a foreign land (Vietnam) opposed by rebel insurgents (VietCong).
Why does most of the world's international trade take place between economies that are similar in their level of economic development?
Because of the reason as bellow: -Regulation and policy -Economic involvement -Technology -Resources -Culture and environment -social responsibility From lay lay168
How far did American Involvement in Vietnam change 1954-1973?
How far did American Involvement in Vietnam change, 1954 -- 1973?American involvement in Vietnam, or Indo-China as it was called when a French colony, began initially when the U.S joined WWII in 1942. At that time the Americans gave weapons and financial aid to help nationalist guerrilla forces led by Vo Nguyen Giap, known as the Viet Minh, in their war of independence against the Japanese who had taken control of the colony. With the Japanese finally defeated in 1945, Ho Chi Minh, a collaborator of Giap's, appealed to the people of Vietnam to rise up in revolution before the French could re-take power. The Viet Minh quickly seized government and police buildings in the north, declaring Ho Chi Minh their president. Ho kept hidden from the anti-communist Americans his communist ideas, and so they raised no objection. However a full scale war shortly broke out between the French and the Viet Minh which dragged on until 1954 when the French were finally defeated at Dien Bien Phu. In this time China had turned communist and had supported the Viet Minh in their struggle. However the U.S, aware of China's involvement, and fearing the spread of communism, supported the French. Despite all this, the French were beaten. France would not be the last western power to underestimate the resolve of the Viet Minh.Here begins the American involvement in Vietnam from 1954 -- 1973. Assuming involvement to be the actions and measures deployed by the American authorities, and not for example, independent American journalists in Vietnam, I will try to show how far this involvement changed in nature and amount.After Dien Bien Phu, an agreement was made at Geneva with involvement from the U.S as well as other major powers (China, America and the Soviet Union) that Vietnam be divided along the 17th parallel and would be temporarily two countries, North and South Vietnam, with Ho Chi Minh leader of the north and Ngo Dinh Diem in the south. Elections for a government to re-unite the country would be held on July 1956. Up until this point America's involvement in Vietnam never extended beyond the political. Post-war America was strongly opposed to the communist ideology which was hostile to their idea of democracy, and feared that it would spread. Under the terms of Geneva, the Americans supported the establishment of an anti-communist government in South Vietnam to act as the cornerstone of the "Free World in South-east Asia" as John. F. Kennedy put it when a senator at the time.With doubtful feelings about its success in achieving its aims at Geneva, the USA felt a deep responsibility to the country of Vietnam after all the commitments it had made to shape its future, both in WWII and in its support of the French attempt to re-conquer it. This view was expressed by Senator John F. Kennedy when describing Vietnam, "It is our offspring, we cannot abandon it, we cannot ignore its needs." (quoted in George C. Herring's "America's Longest War, page 43) Eisenhower echoes this concern in his description of the domino theory, a belief that the countries of South-east Asia were like dominos, waiting to be pushed over by the tide of communism from China and the Soviet Union, where he states "Asia has already lost 450 million of its peoples to communist dictatorship. We simply can't afford greater losses." (quoted in "Vietnam 1960-1975" by S. Waugh and J. Wright) The sources agree and are a reflection of popular American opinion at the time.Eisenhower was an influential and popular president and his anti-communist views were shared by the American public. Kennedy inherited and agreed with the anti-communist attitude. Holding true to the Truman doctrine of 1947, America continued its policy of the containment of communism, doing everything it could to weaken, discreetly, the Viet Minh regime in the North and so hamper its preparation for the elections to come. These surreptitious methods of sabotage included "attempting to destroy the government's printing presses and pouring contaminants into the engines of busses to demobilize the transport system." ("America's Longest War" George C. Herring page 44) and were carried out under the direction of a CIA team to try and encourage people to move to the south. Herring's book is used to teach the subject of the Vietnam War in universities, while Herring himself is a professor of History at the University of Kentucky. For this reason we may consider his book to be a reliable source for a balanced view of the war.Aside from this paramilitary involvement, the Americans established the South-East Asian Treaty Organisation (SEATO) which included the countries of Laos and Cambodia, in their attempts to strengthen ties with other countries in the area and try to deter communist aggression. The determination of Eisenhower to support Diem's corrupt but anti-communist government went as far as allowing official South Vietnamese elections to be rigged in Saigon and backing Diem's refusal to hold the planned elections of 1956. This undermined the American dedication to democracy and freedom of speech as well as America's criticism of Stalin's refusal to hold elections in Eastern Europe. Excuses of alleged North Vietnamese violations of the Geneva agreement aside, the truth of America's motives for the extended political involvement in Vietnam was admitted by Eisenhower himself, "It was generally agreed that had an election been held, Ho Chi Minh would have been elected Premier..." It is likely that Eisenhower is writing with sincerity here because this is after the war when he would have been at more liberty to speak his mind. This disclosure betrays the American awareness of Ho Chi Minh's popularity and possibly Eisenhower's real intentions for supporting Diem's refusal to hold elections.America's approval and support of Diem continued and was expressed by Kennedy's vice president Lyndon Johnson, when visiting Diem in1961, where he makes clear America's commitment to Vietnam and to Diem, hailing him the "Churchill of Asia". While this may be considered hyperbole with regards to Diem, it did show America's willingness to support an anti-communist government. The U.S continued to keep up the input of money, weapons and advice that was being pumped into the country. From 1955-1962 this continued with few changes in the nature of the American involvement in Vietnam. However, the amount steadily increased as the U.S military group known as the MAAG, assumed responsibility over the training of the SVA, instead of the French. In 1961, when Kennedy had become president the year before, he sent 400 advisors in a response to the uprisings led by a new political party that wanted a united Vietnam, called the National Liberation Front (NLF). Advisor levels rose as shown in sources "www.americanwarlibrary.com/vietnam/vwatl.htm" and "wiki.answers.com/Q/U.S._Troop_levels_in_Vietnam_War" which both agree with each other. A rising number of troops is tantamount to a rising amount of involvement and so these sources are useful because they indicate at what rate involvement was increasing or decreasing. However, little direct intervention was made until 1962, when the Americans began spraying defoliants on Vietnamese forests to expose Viet Minh hideouts, supply lines and crops; a sudden turn in American involvement, with Americans openly damaging Vietnamese vegetation. Increased involvement of a domestic kind also occurred in 1962, where the Americans and South Vietnamese governments pioneered the strategic hamlet programme, moving South Vietnamese peasants from suspected Viet Minh areas to purpose-built villages away from Viet Minh threat. The plan was a disaster, raising Viet Minh support and dissent for the Americans.Despite this extended military involvement, America did not engage in open warfare until 1964 with the passing of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. Political involvement within South Vietnam was restrained in the beginning of Diem's government where the Americans let him rule with a free hand. Despite the expanding influence of Americans in the area, Diem remained overall in charge, not always following the advice of his American advisors and so American political involvement was limited to advising. One of the earliest incidents of this (www.rationalrevolution.net/war/american_involvement_in_vietnam) was at the elections for president of the Republic of Vietnam. Having turned a blind eye to their rigging, the Americans urged Diem to show the results as no higher than 70% in his favour, to make it seem convincing. Diem ignored this and used the rigged result of 98.2% instead. By 1963 however, the Americans realised their mistake of backing him and gave support to a plot lead by leading South Vietnamese generals who arrested and shot Diem.Under Lyndon Johnson in 1963, it was becoming clear to America that its advisory role was not sufficient and that direct military action would be needed to defeat the Viet Minh. In 1964, the controversial Gulf of Tonkin incident occurred that gave Johnson his excuse to extend American military involvement. The warship USS Maddox was supposedly fired upon by North Vietnamese ships. Congress reacted furiously, passing the Gulf of Tonkin resolution that permitted the President to take whatever military measures he deemed necessary in Vietnam. Johnson made clear his determination to retaliate with greater military involvement, stating "that all such attacks will be opposed," (S. Waugh and J. Wright, 2010, p.g) At first American involvement was restrained, but after the after further Viet Minh aggression and an incident where "Seven Americans died and 100 were wounded" (Daynes, 2008, p.g 23) The beginning of 1965 saw a sudden escalation of American involvement with the widespread bombing raids of operation "Rolling Thunder" and the departure of thousands of the first US combat troops. By the end of the year troop levels had reached 184,300, eight times more than in 1964.American troops began direct combat with the Viet Minh in Search and Destroy missions that consisted of troops searching for and then destroying suspected Viet Minh villages. The Huey helicopter was instrumental in these missions. The damaging effects of this form of involvement on both the villages and villagers were obvious. "Children were whimpering. Women were poking through the smouldering debris of the houses" (S. Waugh S. Wright, 2010, p.g 19) as the AID worker Doug Ramsey described a scene at a Search and Destroy mission. The source is a reliable one for describing the nature of US involvement at the time, for it is supported by other similar accounts by other Americans (Ben Walsh, date, p.g 302) who would have had no personal obligation to portray the war in any particular way. Over the course of the year, involvement changes a great deal, with extensive bombing not just on North Vietnam but also over the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Chemical weapons such as Napalm were deployed for a higher "body count", something General Westmoreland was convinced would bring victory.Until the announcement of President Nixon's policy of Vietnamization in 1969, the nature of American involvement changed little, with heavy reliance upon, bombing, defoliants, and Search and Destroy missions. The hopelessness of the war becoming apparent, the frustrations of the war were responsible for motivating American atrocities in some villages, most notably My Lai, which exposed the growing criminal nature of some aspects of the war. Speaking in 1967, Ho Chi Minh voiced his outrage at the US involvement, "the US has ceaselessly intervened in Vietnam. The US government has committed war crimes... half a million US troops have resorted to inhumane weapons... used to massacre our people... and raze our villages to the ground... We will never submit to force; never accept talks under threat of bombs." (Ben Walsh, Date, p.g 302) The source is not entirely trustworthy as Ho was speaking as a leader during the war and so one of the purposes of the speech would been to rouse anti-American feeling an Nationalism amongst his people. Still, it does demonstrate, however exaggeratedly, the scale of US involvement, which was increasing till after 1968. Contrary to this disgust of American involvement, one of Lyndon Johnson's justifications of it was, "Our numbers have increased in Vietnam because the aggression of others has increased in Vietnam. There is not, and there will not be, a mindless escalation." The sources differ just as two leaders would who both are fighting a war, but the fact remains clear; American involvement increased vastly in the years up to 1968, as shown in peaking US troop levels (536,100) and troop deaths (16,592) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_casualties downloaded 21st January 2011)To compensate for the reduction in troops that began to pull out in 1969, an intense bombing campaign on Hanoi was launched from 1970 to 1972 to hinder the progression of the Viet Minh and force the North Vietnamese to negotiating a peace. Here one form of involvement decreased (troop levels) for the increase of another (American bombing) However, the general American involvement did rapidly decrease with the withdrawal of 400,000 combat troops from 1969 to the end of 1971, in the sense that less Americans were now involved. A large amount of political involvement occurred in peace talks that had begun in 1968 and which came to a conclusion in 1973. It was agreed that all US troops were to leave Vietnam within 60 days, thus ending America's military involvement. Only the financial aid continued while other forms of involvement declined or completely ceased.In conclusion, the American involvement in Vietnam changed a great deal, with high political, financial and paramilitary involvement throughout and rapidly increasing military involvement until 1969. The nature of military involvement changed a lot with the spraying of defoliants over Vietnamese forests in 1962, to heavy bombing campaigns in the north in 1964, then the arrival of the first combat troops who initially operated a defensive strategy in 1965, which soon became more aggressive with the policy of "Search and Destroy". The nature of the personal involvement of American troops became unacceptable amongst the American public especially after the exposure of the My Lai massacre in 1969. only increased in amount This then rapidly fell with the removal of all troops by 1973.
What state is similar in size to the country of Afghanistan?
Texas.
Why did Britain not get involved in the Vietnam war?
One of the main reasons for the UK's none involvement in the Vietnam War was their role in the Indonesia-Malaysia War which took place at the same time. Britain fought a war against Communist forces similar to that of the US against the Viet Mihn (except unlike the US, Britain won).
What religion were Settlement houses in the South typically run by?
Besides the club women's involvement, women associated with the mission projects of the Dallas Methodist churches established similar institutions called Wesley Houses, named for John Wesley, the founder of Methodism.
Is Pakistan the same as Afghanistan?
I have been to both Pakistan and Afghanistan and could say that most of Pakistan is similar to Afghanistan.. Any area west of Peshawar is like Afghanistan, as this was originally part of Afghanistan and was loaned to Pakistan, but they have yet to give it back.
What was the primary goal of the Progressive Movement?
Repairing the damages caused by industrialization and urbanization by reverting to smaller government, less government involvement in business, and similar things.
